Hauling passengers for hire has largely depended on subsidy since the demise of the stage coach. Mail, express, fuel taxes and other taxes for roads, the F. A. A., the list goes on. How many public resources do you direct where for what number and clientele of passenger.
Is the passenger rail subsidy better spent expanding conventional speed rail? It serves intermediate points high speed rail and air do not. Do you open new routes? Do you expand service on existing routes. If doing so creates a greater market share, where next from there?
As more passengers feed into a hub such as Chicago, will the will and justification be sufficient for speed increases to Indianapolis? Once to Indianapolis, will going from there to Louisville and Cincinnati become the next extensions of higher speed.
As with route structure, do you build speed increases in increments? There is no way to avoid working with private freight railroads. Will taking that partnership in steps make expanding services easier?
Just because the technology exists does not mean a massive commitment is wise, let alone rational. The super sonic passenger planes promised 50 years ago, where are they now?
htgguy schlimm htgguy Can you provide a link to the data on how many people travel the NE Corridor by various modes? I wonder about the lion's share statement. I don't know how many people travel by train, plane, and automobile. Just curious. Thanks, Jim I found this article, but not the original data source, although the figures sound trustworthy. "Despite the fact that trains average only about 80 mph along the corridor today, Amtrak has managed to snag 63% of combined air and rail travel between New York and Washington, compared to 37% before Acela’s implementation. But the rail company only represents about 6% of total corridor travel ridership, so it could see a lot of growth with faster services." http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/26/amtrak-contemplates-a-renewed-northeast-corridor-and-lays-out-the-stakes/ Thanks for the link. I read some of the comments as well-do you think this is accurate? "presently Amtrak would charge you $330 for that round trip… would you actually ever pay that much? Airtran charges $99 on that route, counting fees and taxes (read it and weep on Kayak). I like trains but I’m not a sucker, I’m not paying an extra $230 to be a bleeding heart, even if it was almost as fast (which is all it will ever be). Acela only covers 6% of the market because it’s so expensive, not because it’s not fast enough." Not sure if this was for the NYC-Washington leg or all the way from Boston to DC. This site found round trip airfares between NYC and DC starting at $118, and one way Acela Express at $146, or $292 round trip for the same cities. So there is a cost issue, for sure.
schlimm htgguy Can you provide a link to the data on how many people travel the NE Corridor by various modes? I wonder about the lion's share statement. I don't know how many people travel by train, plane, and automobile. Just curious. Thanks, Jim I found this article, but not the original data source, although the figures sound trustworthy. "Despite the fact that trains average only about 80 mph along the corridor today, Amtrak has managed to snag 63% of combined air and rail travel between New York and Washington, compared to 37% before Acela’s implementation. But the rail company only represents about 6% of total corridor travel ridership, so it could see a lot of growth with faster services." http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/26/amtrak-contemplates-a-renewed-northeast-corridor-and-lays-out-the-stakes/
htgguy Can you provide a link to the data on how many people travel the NE Corridor by various modes? I wonder about the lion's share statement. I don't know how many people travel by train, plane, and automobile. Just curious. Thanks, Jim
Can you provide a link to the data on how many people travel the NE Corridor by various modes? I wonder about the lion's share statement. I don't know how many people travel by train, plane, and automobile. Just curious.
Thanks, Jim
I found this article, but not the original data source, although the figures sound trustworthy.
"Despite the fact that trains average only about 80 mph along the corridor today, Amtrak has managed to snag 63% of combined air and rail travel between New York and Washington, compared to 37% before Acela’s implementation. But the rail company only represents about 6% of total corridor travel ridership, so it could see a lot of growth with faster services."
http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2009/10/26/amtrak-contemplates-a-renewed-northeast-corridor-and-lays-out-the-stakes/
Thanks for the link. I read some of the comments as well-do you think this is accurate?
"presently Amtrak would charge you $330 for that round trip… would you actually ever pay that much? Airtran charges $99 on that route, counting fees and taxes (read it and weep on Kayak). I like trains but I’m not a sucker, I’m not paying an extra $230 to be a bleeding heart, even if it was almost as fast (which is all it will ever be).
Acela only covers 6% of the market because it’s so expensive, not because it’s not fast enough."
Not sure if this was for the NYC-Washington leg or all the way from Boston to DC. This site found round trip airfares between NYC and DC starting at $118, and one way Acela Express at $146, or $292 round trip for the same cities. So there is a cost issue, for sure.
Acella: $266.00. Amtrak Regional service: $142.00 Jet Blue (Reagan to JFK) $207.00 And just for laughs, driving car $61.00 for gas at 20MPG or about $225.00 figuring full cost to own and operate the average car plus parking (if on Manhatten Island-Priceless).
Looking at some days further out, I did find round trip air at $119.
Given the travel stats cited above, it should be obvious that the station/airport to station/airport fares aren't the controling issue.
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
Victrola1 Hauling passengers for hire has largely depended on subsidy since the demise of the stage coach. Mail, express, fuel taxes and other taxes for roads, the F. A. A., the list goes on. How many public resources do you direct where for what number and clientele of passenger. Is the passenger rail subsidy better spent expanding conventional speed rail? It serves intermediate points high speed rail and air do not. Do you open new routes? Do you expand service on existing routes. If doing so creates a greater market share, where next from there? As more passengers feed into a hub such as Chicago, will the will and justification be sufficient for speed increases to Indianapolis? Once to Indianapolis, will going from there to Louisville and Cincinnati become the next extensions of higher speed. As with route structure, do you build speed increases in increments? There is no way to avoid working with private freight railroads. Will taking that partnership in steps make expanding services easier? Just because the technology exists does not mean a massive commitment is wise, let alone rational.
Just because the technology exists does not mean a massive commitment is wise, let alone rational.
Quick question? Where is it that high speed rail services do not stop at intermediate points?
Examine old time tables. The limited did not stop for the milk and an occasional farm wife going shopping in Chicago. It stopped only at larger points, or if operations dictated for crew change, fuel, service. Dwell time at terminals kills speed quicker than anything.
Chicago to Omaha as some now propose via Des Moines, do you stop at every county seat? Do you mix slower speed locals into the mix? Will sufficient business be generated and deposited at larger hubs to make it feasible?
jeaton Acella: $266.00. Amtrak Regional service: $142.00 Jet Blue (Reagan to JFK) $207.00 And just for laughs, driving car $61.00 for gas at 20MPG or about $225.00 figuring full cost to own and operate the average car plus parking (if on Manhatten Island-Priceless). Looking at some days further out, I did find round trip air at $119. Given the travel stats cited above, it should be obvious that the station/airport to station/airport fares aren't the controling issue.
I don't think that would be the issue regarding air travel. But. How about the issue of shut downs due to weather? In the last 3 years I got a detour to another airport because of bad weather 5 times!!---and an involuntary stay at said airport for a couple of days! Yeah. The flights generally don't last long--about a couple of hours but but but--
Then again--there are discussions in some financial/business areas around those low priced seats---that is not helping the airlines much---as the business model that was cobbled around it developed during the era of low fuel prices----which we certainly are not in now----
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
blownout cylinder jeaton Acella: $266.00. Amtrak Regional service: $142.00 Jet Blue (Reagan to JFK) $207.00 And just for laughs, driving car $61.00 for gas at 20MPG or about $225.00 figuring full cost to own and operate the average car plus parking (if on Manhatten Island-Priceless). Looking at some days further out, I did find round trip air at $119. Given the travel stats cited above, it should be obvious that the station/airport to station/airport fares aren't the controling issue. I don't think that would be the issue regarding air travel. But. How about the issue of shut downs due to weather? In the last 3 years I got a detour to another airport because of bad weather 5 times!!---and an involuntary stay at said airport for a couple of days! Yeah. The flights generally don't last long--about a couple of hours but but but-- Then again--there are discussions in some financial/business areas around those low priced seats---that is not helping the airlines much---as the business model that was cobbled around it developed during the era of low fuel prices----which we certainly are not in now----
jeatonI don't know what to say. You could always push the airplane seat back the full 1.5 inches and take a nap or get one of the recliner seats in the waiting room. (They didn't tell you about those?)
The airline simply would not let us camp out!!
We got stuck at a cheesy airport that had a small kinda sorta variety thing for a store and that was it. yay.---- sleeping on the floor was actually pretty good for the back though
You left out tolls on that car trip. Add another $40 or $50 depending on which river crossing you choose to NYC.
jeaton And just for laughs, driving car $61.00 for gas at 20MPG or about $225.00 figuring full cost to own and operate the average car plus parking (if on Manhatten Island-Priceless).
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
oltmannd I doubt you could beat the Acela's time flying into JFK.
BTDT---every time doing the roundy round for about 45 minutes---or more---nah
Instead of building faster trains we need to take the big picture view by looking at ways to eliminate the need for commuting altogether.. Cashiers and bank tellers generally don't commute long distance...it is office people with jobs that can pay for the commute that should be targeted...and alot of that work can be done from home. High speed rails makes the commute less painful..but why not eliminate the commute altogther by looking at the big picture through urban engineering and planning? High speed rail treats the symptom..we should be treating the disease..
I see high speed rail and commuter rail as mutually exclusive.
Commuting gets me from where I live to where I work (and back). It doesn't have to be high-speed, just consistent. Speed simply lets us move folks further faster, but the focus is always local.
High-speed rail should be serving as a replacement for short-hop flying and medium distance driving between commonly travelled-to destinations - exactly as it has in the NEC. I doubt you'll find many people truly commuting on the NEC.
The advancement of high-speed rail should begin with city pairs that will support the service. Once folks get used to that, those city pairs can be included in expanded networks.
While telecommuting does have its advantages, we lack the infrastructure to truly support it. High speed Internet service is far from universal. On top of that, there are many people who can't telecommute. Someone has to sit at the front desk to greet the customers, and somebody has to make that pizza. You can't do that over a fiber optic line.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
There is a sort of discussion going on about HSR anyways in a lot of countries precisely because this is not really dealing with the issue of "urban development".
One of the main culprits--if you can call it that---is/was the single use zonal system currently in vogue in many places. Ranks upon ranks of single family homes/apartments seperated from commercial/retail districts that have nothing at all to do with industrial areas. All over the place we also have giant power centers, miles from where humans live, which causes them to have to drive miles to get whatever or work whererver they go. Now we are closing community schools so we can bus them to giant hypertrophied schools--all the time complaining about how they don't walk to school--which school boards closed so they can bus them 20 miles away from where they live-----
There are many different issues that drive a lot of this talk of a need for HSR that may really not be needed.
Also ----- why the rush anyway? mmmm?
blownout cylinder There is a sort of discussion going on about HSR anyways in a lot of countries precisely because this is not really dealing with the issue of "urban development". One of the main culprits--if you can call it that---is/was the single use zonal system currently in vogue in many places. Ranks upon ranks of single family homes/apartments seperated from commercial/retail districts that have nothing at all to do with industrial areas. All over the place we also have giant power centers, miles from where humans live, which causes them to have to drive miles to get whatever or work whererver they go. Now we are closing community schools so we can bus them to giant hypertrophied schools--all the time complaining about how they don't walk to school--which school boards closed so they can bus them 20 miles away from where they live----- There are many different issues that drive a lot of this talk of a need for HSR that may really not be needed. Also ----- why the rush anyway? mmmm?
I know just what you mean about the school..I went to one of those regional High Schools in the 70s...spent two hours on the school bus every day... about 1900 HOURS of my youthful prime WASTED on transportation to and from school. Contrast that with what my parents and grandparents did: they spent an hour walking to and from school every day... that's about a thousand hours of exercise they got that I never got from my so called progressive school....Maybe we should look to the past for the answers...where people WALKED to work for the most part and the kids WALKED to school... A nice by product of that is we might just get back our communities...where people LIVE among their coworkers schoolmates, family, and friends. Now look what we have...we live among strangers and we waste precious hours in traffic or on the bus/plane/train. It's a crappy existence..not a life..
tree68I doubt you'll find many people truly commuting on the NEC.
Victrola1Examine old time tables. The limited did not stop for the milk and an occasional farm wife going shopping in Chicago. It stopped only at larger points, or if operations dictated for crew change, fuel, service. Dwell time at terminals kills speed quicker than anything. Chicago to Omaha as some now propose via Des Moines, do you stop at every county seat? Do you mix slower speed locals into the mix? Will sufficient business be generated and deposited at larger hubs to make it feasible?
Exactly! Start with the ridership potentials and revenue potentials. Work backward to establish schedule. Iterate to adjust for infrastructure cost and O&M cost. In other words, use a market-based approach, not a make-engineers-happy approach.
RWM
oltmanndDon't let the tail wag the dog. The route, ridership and fare vs speed should determine where, and how often the stops are. Write the equation and find the max.
Well, sure. Sounds like several factors need to be examined simultaneously: The size of potential markets (in terms of population concentrations) will vary according to the time (for rail, under 5 hours?) it takes to get somewhere else. So of course, the speed does matter, as do ticket price and frequency and convenience of service. In other words, a real market analysis.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm oltmanndDon't let the tail wag the dog. The route, ridership and fare vs speed should determine where, and how often the stops are. Write the equation and find the max. Well, sure. Sounds like several factors need to be examined simultaneously: The size of potential markets (in terms of population concentrations) will vary according to the time (for rail, under 5 hours?) it takes to get somewhere else. So of course, the speed does matter, as do ticket price and frequency and convenience of service. In other words, a real market analysis.
Now this is starting to be more into what is really needed. What would the ideal market size be? What market sectors are going to use the service? Routing? Timing? Locations of potential stations? Cost? Speed as related to time? Even timeframe--as in over how long is the process to take? --- Then do a realistic financial analysis as to the feasibility of such. How is it to be accomplished? Contract bidding procedures---
----great----now lets see whether this'll happen as such
oltmanndtree68I doubt you'll find many people truly commuting on the NEC. You mean on Amtrak, I hope. But, there are LOTS of folk who commute on Amtrak. Not as many as before Amtrak raised the monthly ticket prices a while back, but still quite a few. The Harrisburg line is likely a very high percentage or commuters. As you raise the speeds, the practical commuting distance increases.
tree68 oltmanndtree68I doubt you'll find many people truly commuting on the NEC. You mean on Amtrak, I hope. But, there are LOTS of folk who commute on Amtrak. Not as many as before Amtrak raised the monthly ticket prices a while back, but still quite a few. The Harrisburg line is likely a very high percentage or commuters. As you raise the speeds, the practical commuting distance increases.True enough. Still, I don't equate HSR with commuting.
From my experience living and working in the Chicago area for 30 years, I can say that I have known many with commutes of over one and up to two hours (one way). Given a likely ticket price I agree that regular daily commuters are probably going to be a relatively small percentage of the passenger count, but it will be the cost and not the time.
Amtrak sells an unlimited monthly ticket for travel between Milwaukee and Chicago for $385. (85 miles and 1 hr 30 min). It would be interesting to know how many of them are sold.
You don't equate high speed rail with commuting? I don't either, but high speed rail can certainly INCLUDE commuting. Senator Pell regularly rode the Providence - Washington sleeper picked up and dropped off by the Boston - Washington Federal. Then there is Joe Bidden, an Amtrak high speed rail commuter, since he regularly uses Acela for his nearly DAILY commute. Even in the old days, with good passenger service, but no high speed, there were businessmen who made a WEEKLY COMMUTES New York -Chicago on the 20th Century or Broadway.
Doesn't MARC essentially operate high speed rail commuter service in the Baltimore - Washington corridor via the Penn Line?
Regarding the mix of high speed and local trains. In the NE corridor, local service is provided by the commuter authorities, but the two small remaing gaps, New London-Kingston and Newark, DL - Townsend MD, should be filled and the services better coordinated including Metro North New Haven line service to Penn Station. A similar situation exists LA - San Diego, except there is better coordination but no high speed as yet. But where population does not support an instensive local service, the high speed intercity service should be supplemented by connecting BUSES. Someone in Hudson, New York, should not find it terribly difficult to board a bus to Albany-Rensellaer to catch a high speed train to Cleveland, Detroit, or Chicago, or to Poughkeepsie to catch a connecting Metro North express to Grand Central. John Barariger proposed such coordination in a railroading in the future article in Trains some 55 years ago.
schlimmoltmanndDon't let the tail wag the dog. The route, ridership and fare vs speed should determine where, and how often the stops are. Write the equation and find the max. Well, sure. Sounds like several factors need to be examined simultaneously: The size of potential markets (in terms of population concentrations) will vary according to the time (for rail, under 5 hours?) it takes to get somewhere else. So of course, the speed does matter, as do ticket price and frequency and convenience of service. In other words, a real market analysis.
Let us clear up a few things.
1. You can not compare "Jet Blue" or "Southwest" to "Acela Service". Yes, the "in air" flight time is very low, and is still low if you count "gate to gate". The named Airlines are People Movers, Coach Service, frequent low cost service. Get to the Airport early or you may get "bumped", go through Security, have your bag scanned or as checked baggage.
2. The "Acela" is "First Class" (2 -1 seating) and "Business Class" (2 -2 seating) ONLY. Reclining seats, swing up foot rests, 120 volt outlets on each seat for your computer, cell phone service, and if you want quiet, they have a quiet car. You can not compare "Coach" airfare to "First Class" rail fare. Price out "First Class" service on your airline, if it is even offered by a discount airline. Compare Amtrak Regional Coach fare to your discount airline fare.
3. Think of the "Acela" as a business man's service. Check out of your Washington (or Boston) hotel room, take a short taxi ride to Union Station (or walk to Back Bay Station in Boston), pick up a ticket and board the next hourly "Acela". Arrive at Penn Station in the heart of Manhattan. You want to fly, check out of your hotel and take a taxi to your airport so you arrive at least 1 hour before flight time. Fly to your destination, wait to unload at the gate, hunt down your baggage at the baggage pickup , get a taxi back into your destination city. Now compare cost "Coach" airfare including taxi and any checked baggage to Amtrak "Coach" plus taxi. If you compare time in the Northest Corridor it will be close.
Don U. TCA 73-5735
Don that picture is out of date.
There are now panels falling out of the ceiling and the door at the end constantly opens and closes itself at random.
Oh, and the flourescent lamps are all different colors now.
While I'm at it, NO CHECKED BAGGAGE on Acela.
aegrotatio Don that picture is out of date. There are now panels falling out of the ceiling and the door at the end constantly opens and closes itself at random. Oh, and the flourescent lamps are all different colors now. While I'm at it, NO CHECKED BAGGAGE on Acela.
So much for HSR being profitable?
Friend told me recently after coming back to London ON on a flight to Japan---via a series of hop skips and jumps---most of the planes had things like air resps falling into his lap, movies not working, coffee being made and not showing up, one had no working lights on his side of the plane, just lovely stuff.
Everybody be into cutting those corners to maximize the margins I guess---
Yep, on the "Acela" baggage is all "carry on", overhead bins, under seats, compartment at the end of car. No baggage to check, claim, or get lost.
If something is wrong, the Conductor should enter the problem on his "touch screen computer" in his compartment in the food service car. The information is "dumped" going through New York and repair crews should meet the train in Washington to fix it. That was the way it was 5 years ago when I was walked through it, now ???? They had me check "Fireman's Seat", then check "Broken", as the "Acela" does not have a Fireman it's used as a test signal.
Note, one section of the overhead light panels is a "easy out rescue panel", above it is an un-reinforced section of the car body that is easy to chop through in case of a rollover accident.
Entering service in 2000, some are now 10 years old and are being rebuilt inside, anyone for Leather Seats!
Regarding an HSR market analysis:
The question of why we should have HSR has been answered in a variety of ways. These are the most common answers I have heard:
1) It will reduce congestion on highways.
2) It will be safer than highway travel.
3) It will save fuel to the extent it replaces air and highway travel.
4) It will use less land than highways.
5) It will show our friends that we are civilized.
6) It will keep us competitive with the rest of the world.
7) It will keep foreign countries from purchasing our country.
8) It can be powered by renewable energy sources.
9) Its construction will stimulate the economy.
10) Its construction and operation will create jobs.
All of these reasons have nothing to do with the personal preference of individuals in the marketplace. Instead, they are collectivized benefits that flow to society as if that society were composed of a homogenized mass of people who all have the same identical interests. These reasons set aside the issue of personal preference in favor of the interest of society as a whole.
A marketing analysis would be necessary to determine what to build where in order to get the biggest bang for the buck. However, one major difficulty of the market analysis is that the items comprising the “bang” are very hard to quantify. What our friends think of us, for instance, is a largely a matter of fashion and style.
Another problem with a market analysis for HSR is that HSR will be publicly financed. Unlike private investment, public financing does not necessarily require that the investment make a profit. Therefore, in the case of an investment that does not need to be profitable, the market analysis becomes quite subjective in its result.
Yet another factor that will make a marketing analysis difficult with HSR is that the government can skew the market by adding taxes to gasoline in order to force people to drive less.
Another factor is that politicians making public investment are influenced by the political advantage that will redound to them. Government, as a whole, is motivated to expand itself, and is therefore likely to proceed with projects regardless if they are justified by the needs of the people.
If the issue to be found by a market analysis were simply a question of how many people would ride a train from point A to point B, and the price they would be willing to pay, in a private business venture that needed to show a specific profit; then a market analysis would be very straight forward, and it would determine whether to go ahead with the investment or not.
But in the case of government financed HSR, with no need of profit, guided and influenced by political motivations, considering government’s ability to skew the market, and justified by a wide variety of intangible objectives, I cannot see how a meaningful market analysis can possibly be produced. If anything, such a market analysis will end up being a sham used to sell the public something they don’t need in order to fatten politicians.
Bucyrus, very well an analyzed and presented. Of all the items on our table now this should be far-far down on the list.
The California $40+ billion estimate has been discredited and a number at least twice that amount is now being considered, but as government project go it may be three or more times that amount if built.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.